This thesis attempts to apply postcolonial studies on the case of Korean Chinese who are doubly dislocated and otherized, as I argue. It examines the identity of Korean Chinese as Korean ethnic minority in China and also ethnic return migrants in South Korea expressed in the literature. It explores the factors that trigger the identity crisis of Korean Chinese and constantly causing them to search for a new home. In doing so, two works written by a second-generation of Korean Chinese novelist named Hŏ Ryŏn-sun (1955-), Windflower (Paramkkot) and Who Saw the Nest of Butterfly?, published in 1996 and 2004, will be examined, which deal with diasporic experiences of Korean Chinese in China and South Korea. Mainly grounded on the theories of Gayatri
…show more content…
The CCP constantly highlighted Korean minority as a “model nationality (minzu)” (or “model minority”) and Yanbian as a “model autonomy area in China”. Moreover, their loyalty to CCP was praised. The model minority discourse and its derived (positive) stereotypes on the case of Korean minority in China, thus should not be simply understood as either Koreans’ self-representations or ungrounded discourse and stereotypes created by the CCP. The making of discourse on Korean minority has been firmly grounded on the National Unity and territorial …show more content…
The Koreanness was relentlessly suppressed under the phase of Cultural Revolution. Koreans’ relatively privileged status and their prosperity in economy, education, and literature were deprived. This is supported by the Olivier’s assertion in terms of Koreans’ underprivileged status in the post-Mao period: “The Koreans who were formerly wealthier and better educated than Han, ultimately became disadvantaged in the post-Mao period and started to fall behind the increasingly successful Han”. The Open Door policy was further put the model minority discourse in question as it made the disadvantaged status clearer. Besides, the status of Koreans was exacerbated by their reluctance in reacting towards the CCP’s economic reform, which might be resulted from their victimized experiences in Cultural Revolution. The normalized diplomatic relations between China and South Korea in 1992 provided as an alternative to Korean Chinese. Besides, the cultural and economic penetration of South Korea into Yanbian began to ignite the desire of reconnecting with the ancestral homeland. Thus, Korean Chinese began to regard South Korea as an ideal place for improving their economic status and it re-emerged as an ideal “homeland”. The re-emerged ethnic affinity between Korean Chinese and South Korean led the China’s officials to re-evaluate the Korean Chinese
The CCP constantly highlighted Korean minority as a “model nationality (minzu)” (or “model minority”) and Yanbian as a “model autonomy area in China”. Moreover, their loyalty to CCP was praised. The model minority discourse and its derived (positive) stereotypes on the case of Korean minority in China, thus should not be simply understood as either Koreans’ self-representations or ungrounded discourse and stereotypes created by the CCP. The making of discourse on Korean minority has been firmly grounded on the National Unity and territorial …show more content…
The Koreanness was relentlessly suppressed under the phase of Cultural Revolution. Koreans’ relatively privileged status and their prosperity in economy, education, and literature were deprived. This is supported by the Olivier’s assertion in terms of Koreans’ underprivileged status in the post-Mao period: “The Koreans who were formerly wealthier and better educated than Han, ultimately became disadvantaged in the post-Mao period and started to fall behind the increasingly successful Han”. The Open Door policy was further put the model minority discourse in question as it made the disadvantaged status clearer. Besides, the status of Koreans was exacerbated by their reluctance in reacting towards the CCP’s economic reform, which might be resulted from their victimized experiences in Cultural Revolution. The normalized diplomatic relations between China and South Korea in 1992 provided as an alternative to Korean Chinese. Besides, the cultural and economic penetration of South Korea into Yanbian began to ignite the desire of reconnecting with the ancestral homeland. Thus, Korean Chinese began to regard South Korea as an ideal place for improving their economic status and it re-emerged as an ideal “homeland”. The re-emerged ethnic affinity between Korean Chinese and South Korean led the China’s officials to re-evaluate the Korean Chinese